My tests aren't in the same package as my code. I find this a less cluttered way of organising a codebase with a lot of test files, and I've read that it's a good idea in order to limit tests to interacting via the package's public api.
So it looks something like this:
api_client:
Client.go
ArtistService.go
...
api_client_tests
ArtistService.Events_test.go
ArtistService.Info_test.go
UtilityFunction.go
...
I can type go test bandsintown-api/api_client_tests -cover
and see 0.181s coverage: 100.0% of statements. But that's actually just coverage over my UtilityFunction.go (as I say when I ran go test bandsintown-api/api_client_tests -cover=cover.out and
go tool cover -html=cover.out).
Is there any way to get the coverage for the actual api_client package under test, without bringing it all into the same package?
As it is mentioned in comments you can run
go test -cover -coverpkg "api_client" "api_client_tests"
to run the tests with coverage.
But splitting code files from tests files to a different directories isn't a Go's way.
I suppose that you want to have a black-box testing(nothing package-private stuff can be accessible outside, even for tests).
To accomplish this it's allowed to have tests in another package(without moving the files). Example:
api_client.go
package api_client
// will not be accessible outside of the package
var privateVar = 10
func Method() {
}
api_client_test.go
package api_client_tests
import "testing"
func TestClient(t *testing.T) {
Method()
}
Related
Is there an established best practice for separating unit tests and integration tests in GoLang (testify)? I have a mix of unit tests (which do not rely on any external resources and thus run really fast) and integration tests (which do rely on any external resources and thus run slower). So, I want to be able to control whether or not to include the integration tests when I say go test.
The most straight-forward technique would seem to be to define a -integrate flag in main:
var runIntegrationTests = flag.Bool("integration", false
, "Run the integration tests (in addition to the unit tests)")
And then to add an if-statement to the top of every integration test:
if !*runIntegrationTests {
this.T().Skip("To run this test, use: go test -integration")
}
Is this the best I can do? I searched the testify documentation to see if there is perhaps a naming convention or something that accomplishes this for me, but didn't find anything. Am I missing something?
#Ainar-G suggests several great patterns to separate tests.
This set of Go practices from SoundCloud recommends using build tags (described in the "Build Constraints" section of the build package) to select which tests to run:
Write an integration_test.go, and give it a build tag of integration. Define (global) flags for things like service addresses and connect strings, and use them in your tests.
// +build integration
var fooAddr = flag.String(...)
func TestToo(t *testing.T) {
f, err := foo.Connect(*fooAddr)
// ...
}
go test takes build tags just like go build, so you can call go test -tags=integration. It also synthesizes a package main which calls flag.Parse, so any flags declared and visible will be processed and available to your tests.
As a similar option, you could also have integration tests run by default by using a build condition // +build !unit, and then disable them on demand by running go test -tags=unit.
#adamc comments:
For anyone else attempting to use build tags, it's important that the // +build test comment is the first line in your file, and that you include a blank line after the comment, otherwise the -tags command will ignore the directive.
Also, the tag used in the build comment cannot have a dash, although underscores are allowed. For example, // +build unit-tests will not work, whereas // +build unit_tests will.
To elaborate on my comment to #Ainar-G's excellent answer, over the past year I have been using the combination of -short with Integration naming convention to achieve the best of both worlds.
Unit and Integration tests harmony, in the same file
Build flags previously forced me to have multiple files (services_test.go, services_integration_test.go, etc).
Instead, take this example below where the first two are unit tests and I have an integration test at the end:
package services
import "testing"
func TestServiceFunc(t *testing.T) {
t.Parallel()
...
}
func TestInvalidServiceFunc3(t *testing.T) {
t.Parallel()
...
}
func TestPostgresVersionIntegration(t *testing.T) {
if testing.Short() {
t.Skip("skipping integration test")
}
...
}
Notice the last test has the convention of:
using Integration in the test name.
checking if running under -short flag directive.
Basically, the spec goes: "write all tests normally. if it is a long-running tests, or an integration test, follow this naming convention and check for -short to be nice to your peers."
Run only Unit tests:
go test -v -short
this provides you with a nice set of messages like:
=== RUN TestPostgresVersionIntegration
--- SKIP: TestPostgresVersionIntegration (0.00s)
service_test.go:138: skipping integration test
Run Integration Tests only:
go test -run Integration
This runs only the integration tests. Useful for smoke testing canaries in production.
Obviously the downside to this approach is if anyone runs go test, without the -short flag, it will default to run all tests - unit and integration tests.
In reality, if your project is large enough to have unit and integration tests, then you most likely are using a Makefile where you can have simple directives to use go test -short in it. Or, just put it in your README.md file and call it the day.
I see three possible solutions. The first is to use the short mode for unit tests. So you would use go test -short with unit tests and the same but without the -short flag to run your integration tests as well. The standard library uses the short mode to either skip long-running tests, or make them run faster by providing simpler data.
The second is to use a convention and call your tests either TestUnitFoo or TestIntegrationFoo and then use the -run testing flag to denote which tests to run. So you would use go test -run 'Unit' for unit tests and go test -run 'Integration' for integration tests.
The third option is to use an environment variable, and get it in your tests setup with os.Getenv. Then you would use simple go test for unit tests and FOO_TEST_INTEGRATION=true go test for integration tests.
I personally would prefer the -short solution since it's simpler and is used in the standard library, so it seems like it's a de facto way of separating/simplifying long-running tests. But the -run and os.Getenv solutions offer more flexibility (more caution is required as well, since regexps are involved with -run).
I was trying to find a solution for the same recently.
These were my criteria:
The solution must be universal
No separate package for integration tests
The separation should be complete (I should be able to run integration tests only)
No special naming convention for integration tests
It should work well without additional tooling
The aforementioned solutions (custom flag, custom build tag, environment variables) did not really satisfy all the above criteria, so after a little digging and playing I came up with this solution:
package main
import (
"flag"
"regexp"
"testing"
)
func TestIntegration(t *testing.T) {
if m := flag.Lookup("test.run").Value.String(); m == "" || !regexp.MustCompile(m).MatchString(t.Name()) {
t.Skip("skipping as execution was not requested explicitly using go test -run")
}
t.Parallel()
t.Run("HelloWorld", testHelloWorld)
t.Run("SayHello", testSayHello)
}
The implementation is straightforward and minimal. Although it requires a simple convention for tests, but it's less error prone. Further improvement could be exporting the code to a helper function.
Usage
Run integration tests only across all packages in a project:
go test -v ./... -run ^TestIntegration$
Run all tests (regular and integration):
go test -v ./... -run .\*
Run only regular tests:
go test -v ./...
This solution works well without tooling, but a Makefile or some aliases can make it easier to user. It can also be easily integrated into any IDE that supports running go tests.
The full example can be found here: https://github.com/sagikazarmark/modern-go-application
I encourage you to look at Peter Bourgons approach, it is simple and avoids some problems with the advice in the other answers: https://peter.bourgon.org/blog/2021/04/02/dont-use-build-tags-for-integration-tests.html
There are many downsides to using build tags, short mode or flags, see here.
I would recommend using environment variables with a test helper that can be imported into individual packages:
func IntegrationTest(t *testing.T) {
t.Helper()
if os.Getenv("INTEGRATION") == "" {
t.Skip("skipping integration tests, set environment variable INTEGRATION")
}
}
In your tests you can now easily call this at the start of your test function:
func TestPostgresQuery(t *testing.T) {
IntegrationTest(t)
// ...
}
Why I would not recommend using either -short or flags:
Someone who checks out your repository for the first time should be able to run go test ./... and all tests are passing which is often not the case if this relies on external dependencies.
The problem with the flag package is that it will work until you have integration tests across different packages and some will run flag.Parse() and some will not which will lead to an error like this:
go test ./... -integration
flag provided but not defined: -integration
Usage of /tmp/go-build3903398677/b001/foo.test:
Environment variables appear to be the most flexible, robust and require the least amount of code with no visible downsides.
I am writing unit tests for my golang code, and there are a couple methods that I would like to be ignored when coverage is calculated. Is this possible? If so, how?
One way to do it would be to put the functions you don't want tested in a separate go file, and use a build tag to keep it from being included during tests. For example, I do this sometimes with applications where I have a main.go file with the main function, maybe a usage function, etc., that don't get tested. Then you can add a test tag or something, like go test -v -cover -tags test and the main might look something like:
//+build !test
package main
func main() {
// do stuff
}
func usage() {
// show some usage info
}
I have a unit test project which uses Ninject to mock the database repositories. I would like to use these same tests as integration tests and use Ninject to bind my real database repositories back into their respective implementations so as to test/stress the application into the DB.
Is there a way to do this with Visual Studio 2012 or is there another test framework, other than MSTest, which allows for this type of configuration?
I would really hate to rewrite/copy these unit tests into an integration test project but I suspect I could copy the files in as links and have a single test file compiled into two projects (Unit and Integration).
Thanks
Todd
Your requirements sound really odd to me. The difference between a unit test and an integration test is much bigger than just connecting to a database or not. An integration test either has a much bigger scope, or tests if components communicate correctly. When you write a unit test, the scope of such a unit is normally small (one class/component with all dependencies mocked out), which means there is no need for using a DI container.
Let me put it differently. When the tests are exactly the same, why are you interested to do the same test with and without the database. Just leave the database in and just test that. Besides these tests, you can add 'real' unit tests, that have a much smaller scope.
With Nunit you can do this with TestCase,
say you need to use the unit and unit/integration test using CustomerRepository and OrderRepository,
[TestFixture]
public class TestCustomerRepository
{
IKernel _unit;
Ikernel _integration;
[SetUp]
public void Setup()
{
//setup both kernels
}
[TestCase("Unit")]
[TestCase("Integration")]
public void DoTest(String type)
{
var custRepo = GetRepo<ICustomerRepository>(type);
var orderRepo = GetRepo<IOrderRepository>(type);
//do the test here
}
protected T GetRepo<T>(String type)
{
if (type.Equals("Unit"))
{
return _unit.Get<T>();
}
return _integration.Get<T>();
}
}
This is the basic idea.
Preface
I'm new to Unit Testing and rather new to C++. Recently I had some experience with test driven development in Ruby using RSpec. Now I'm trying getting similar working in C++ with Boost's unit testing framework.
Scenario
I'm organising my header and source files of the application in a directory /src under the project's root folder. As I've seen it multiple times around in other C++ programs, having the tests in a directory /tests in the project's root directory seems reasonable.
Now I want to replicate the directory structure of the source files as well in the tests. Thus, assume I've got the following source/header file structure:
/src
/controller
controller_class.h
controller_class.cpp
/model
model_a.h
model_a.cpp
model_b.h
model_b.cpp
/view
simple_view.h
simple_view.cpp
And thus the tests are organised as followed
/tests
TestRunner.cpp
/controller
controller_class_test.cpp
/model
model_a_test.cpp
model_b_test.cpp
/view
simple_view_test.cpp
For the TestRunner.cpp I took the example from this blog post:
#define BOOST_TEST_DYN_LINK
#define BOOST_TEST_MODULE "MyProgram Unit Tests"
#include <boost/test/unit_test.hpp>
Problem
I now thought to continue in TestRunner.cpp with the creation of the basic test suits (for controller, model and view) as follows
BOOST_AUTO_TEST_SUITE ( controller )
//some stuff here
BOOST_AUTO_TEST_SUITE_END()
BOOST_AUTO_TEST_SUITE ( model )
//some stuff here
BOOST_AUTO_TEST_SUITE_END()
BOOST_AUTO_TEST_SUITE ( view )
//some stuff here
BOOST_AUTO_TEST_SUITE_END()
Desire
But how can I now integrate further nested test suites and cases into these top-level test suits? I finally want to have the actual test cases only appear in the *_test.cpp files. While each of those files wrap the test cases into one additional test suite:
Master Test Module (TestRunner.cpp)
Controller Test Suite (TestRunner.cpp)
Controller Class Test Suite (controller_class_test.cpp)
Controller Class Test Cases (controller_class_test.cpp)
Model Test Suite (TestRunner.cpp)
Model A Test Suite (model_a_test.cpp)
Model A Test Cases (model_a_test.cpp)
Model B Test Suite (model_b_test.cpp)
Model B Test Cases (model_B_test.cpp)
View Test Suite (TestRunner.cpp)
Simple View Test Suite (simple_view_test.cpp)
Simple View Test Cases (simple_view_test.cpp)
Question
How do I have to include the nested suits and cases in the respective higher level suite? I could not find anything in the Boost documentation, though The Unit Test Framework > User's guide > Test organization > Test suite > Automated registration came pretty close.
In Ruby with RSpec one just needs to place the test files (read: *_spec.rb) the way I did and its automatically iterating through them. I guess, with Boost I have to explicitly declare it that way.
Boost.Test test suites are similar to C++ namespaces. You can restart them any time. Each of your test files just need to place test cases in correct test suites:
controller_class_a_test.cpp:
BOOST_AUTO_TEST_SUITE( controller )
BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE( test_class_a )
{
}
BOOST_AUTO_TEST_SUITE_END()
controller_class_b_test.cpp:
BOOST_AUTO_TEST_SUITE( controller )
BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE( test_class_b )
{
}
BOOST_AUTO_TEST_SUITE_END()
The same concept applies to the test tree of any depth. Also you do not need top level TestRunner.cpp at all. Just combine all your test files into a single test module and Boost.Test will take care about the rest.
I am looking for a test framework that suit my requirements. Following are the steps that I need to perform during automated testing:
SetUp (There are some input files, that needs to be read or copied into some specific folders.)
Execute (Run the stand alone)
Tear Down (Clean up to bring the system in its old state)
Apart from this I also want to have some intelligence to make sure if a .cc file changed, all the tests that can validate the changes should be run.
I am evaluating PyUnit, cppunit with scons for this. Thought of running this question to make sure I am on right direction. Can you suggest any other test framework tools? And what other requirements should be considered to select right test framework?
Try googletest AKA gTest it is no worse then any other unit test framework, but can as well beat some with the ease of use. Not exactly a tool for integration testing you are looking for, but can easily be applied in most cases. This wikipedia page might also be useful for you.
Here is a copy of a sample on the gTest project page:
#include <gtest/gtest.h>
namespace {
// The fixture for testing class Foo.
class FooTest : public ::testing::Test {
protected:
// You can remove any or all of the following functions if its body
// is empty.
FooTest() {
// You can do set-up work for each test here.
}
virtual ~FooTest() {
// You can do clean-up work that doesn't throw exceptions here.
}
// If the constructor and destructor are not enough for setting up
// and cleaning up each test, you can define the following methods:
virtual void SetUp() {
// Code here will be called immediately after the constructor (right
// before each test).
}
virtual void TearDown() {
// Code here will be called immediately after each test (right
// before the destructor).
}
// Objects declared here can be used by all tests in the test case for Foo.
};
// Tests that Foo does Xyz.
TEST_F(FooTest, DoesXyz) {
// Exercises the Xyz feature of Foo.
}
Scons could take care of building your .cc when they are changed, gTest can be used to setUp and tearDown your tests.
I can only add that we are using gTest in some cases, and a custom in-house test automation framework in almost all other. It is often a case with such tools that it might be easier to write your own than try to adjust and tweak some other to match your requirements.
One good option IMO, and it is something our test automation framework is moving towards, is using nosetests, coupled with a library of common routines (like start/stop services, get status of something, enable/disable logging in certain components etc.). This gives you a flexible system that is also fairly easy to use. And since it uses python and not C++ or something like that, more people can be busy creating test cases, including QEs, which not necessarily need to be able to write C++.
After reading this article http://gamesfromwithin.com/exploring-the-c-unit-testing-framework-jungle some time ago I went for CxxTest.
Once you have the thing set up (you need to install python for instance) it's pretty easy to write tests (I was completely new to unit tests)
I use it at work, integrated as a visual studio project in my solution. It produces a clickable output when a test fails, and the tests are built and run each time I build the solution.